User Score
7.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1252 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Fantastic movie! It kept my attention from beginning to end, which is hard to do for a movie that is over 2 hours long! The story was the best ever for Spider-Man, and everything was easy to understand and follow. Intense action sequences and very little to no swearing. Be sure to stay through half of the credits, there is a surprise at the end for a plot for a sequel!
  2. Jul 6, 2012
    5
    I loved it and hated it at the same time. I don't think it was as good as Spider-Man or Spider-Man 2...Spider Man 3 sucked, so it was better than that one. I think if you're going to reboot a series so soon, you should only do it if the former sucked and needed to be redone. I don't think the 2002 Spider-Man needed to be redone. I'm all for more Spider-Man movies with a new actor in a new universe, that's just fine, but 75% of this movie was just his origin story that we just saw in 2002 Spider-Man. I was just sitting there thinking "yeah, I know, move on already" for 90 minutes. Yeah, a few details were different...I think they could have changed more. I could also tell that this movie was very geared towards teenagers and the MTV crowd, and that made it seem stupid to me. The Twilight preview before the movie didn't help. Neither did the girls screaming "woo" in the theatre when Peter and Gwen kissed. Please. I also HATE cheesy 3D tricks, and this movie ended with the stupidest "this would look cool in 3D!" trick ever. It it so stupid and cheesy and not quality cinema. I don't give a crap about 3D! I just want to see a movie with real characters and a story, not watch Spider-Man shoot a web right at my face just because it would look cool in 3D. So enough venting, there were things I liked. One thing I did like was that they did a more humorous take on Spider-Man. This one definitely was funnier that the previous series. They also were obviously going for a more realistic character, as even as Spider-Man he was still clumsy, and his climbing and jumping was more human and less overdone with CGI. They also allowed the suit to look like real clothing, and not digitally enhanced. You could see wrinkles and I think even a zipper. How "perfect" the spidey suit always looked in the previous movies always bugged me. So, I kind of liked the new one, even though it seemed unpolished, since that's what they were going for. Overall it was entertaining and worth seeing, but most of the movie was unnecessary and redundant. Expand
  3. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    AMAZING SPIDER-MAN: 9.5 This film is a terrific "reboot" of the spider-man franchise. While we did have some retread of familiar ground, the necessary story elements that were repeated were done in a slightly fresher approach. From the spider bite origin of our hero to the inevitable death of Uncle Ben each classic moment was given a fresh coat of paint and melded into the modern story nicely. Even though I did enjoy Toby's portrait of the web head, Andrew Garfield fits the bill as BOTH high-schooler Peter Parker and Spidey himself. Garfield able to maintain every bit of the character in and out of the blue and red costume that made his portrayal feel more like the comic book character than ever before. The changes in the costume were not distracting in the least, the main villain was well thought out and acted plus all of the supporting characters built the frame work for what could be a terrific series of Spider-man Movies for today's audience. It may not be the big "explosive" blockbuster that was Avengers, but it is full of fun,heart and excitement all the same. Go see it and finally see why SPIDER-MAN has been such an enduring comic book character all these years. I look forward to more films in this newly minted franchise. Expand
  4. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    I just finished watching the midnight showing and I can proudly say that this movie is an improvement over the previous ones. The way he gets his powers and why he has them are much more explained. The villain is amazing and the actors are great. There's also some comedy which put together with everything else makes this a fantastic movie.
  5. Jul 11, 2012
    0
    This movied is the definition of boring. It is basically the same as the first spiderman with the lizard instead of green Goblin as well as spiderman getting his powers in a new way. Too add to that, the first spiderman movies already had pleasing visuals where as this one had effects that were just ugly to watch. The Lizard looked so fake it were as if I was looking at a creature from minecraft. In fact I challenge those who read this review to watch spiderman 1 and tell me the amazing spiderman is still a good movie. The acting was poor and forced and the only real part I enjoyed of this movie was watching uncle ben get shot and adrew garfield crying like a little girl. In comparison this movie is no where near as good as the first and second spiderman, yet it may be better then the third however that is no accomplishment. Overall this movie is a fail and it is an embarsment to the other spiderman movies, I cant even say that this one is a remake, for any two year old could of made a movie like this. Just dont waste your money. Expand
  6. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    This Movie By far was better than the entire Raimi trilogy. The story was compelling and the action scenes were great. Not to mention Spider-Man cracking jokes is awesome (Just like he should be) As for the 3D effects they were quite good especially The first-person shots. That's when the 3D shined, But the 3D is great throughout the entire film. I also like the relationship with Gwen and Peter. Also the fact that Spider-man is a Vigilante to The police which was actually very very compelling. Also the ending was top notch!. You should stay after the credits when the film is over ;) Expand
  7. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    A lot of people give this film hate simply because it was an early reboot, which I admit was a ridiculous move by Sony, and I was having doubts about this movie. But I saw it at the midnight showing and was blown anyway. Andrew Garfield is perfect as Spider-Man, although he does play Peter Parker with is awkward demeanour a lot better. Emma Stone is completely likeable and a great replacement for MJ and their romance is very well done. Rhys Ifans was the only lacking part for me, he acted a bit too much like Willem Dafoe did in the 1st Spider-Man. And I didn't really like the design of the lizard in this one. But the CGI for everything else was spectacular, especially in the last action sequence. The ending wasn't that fantastic it left a lot of questions unanswered, but overall it was a great movie. The origin story seemed to put off a few people so I can't wait to see what they do next! Expand
  8. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    I attended the midnight premier of The Amazing Spiderman last night and I'd have to say that it is the best Spiderman movie to ever hit theaters. It is far superior to the previous Tobey Maguire trilogy. The acting is great by Garfield and Stone and the actor playing Dr. Connors plays the role perfectly. It seems that the negative reviews for this movie are coming from people who are grasping for attention by saying they disliked the movie. This is a great movie for any Spiderman fan. Expand
  9. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    I went into this with low expectations but really really enjoyed what it had to offer. Honestly, Im a huge spiderman fan regardless growing up in the 80s and 90s but this really was better then the avengers. The CGI is flawless and imax 3D make this movie look absolutely amazing. The story was very compelling and the star studded cast was fantastic from Dennis Leary to Emma Stone who should be nominated for some type of award.

    There were its share of cheesy moments but this is a super hero movie and it is to be expected. Also, if I had to complain about anything, it would be the terrible music and sound throughout the movie. Truly, music can really make or break certain parts and this movies sound music wise was pretty terrible. Regardless for any super hero fan, an absolute must see
    Expand
  10. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Saw the midnight premiere and was blown away by how great the movie was. The movie went into so much more detail than the original trilogy. The characters are amazing and the relationship between Peter and Gwenneth is done very well. The movie is fun and exciting. Get your tickets!
  11. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    First, I like a lot, how close to the comic. I did not like to see that in Raimi's trilogy, good old Spidey networks launched "organically" so to speak. Why, what sense does it make the gesture mythical fingers to operate the spinner, if no action button? I liked that idea in the previous films, really.
    In "The Amazing" spinner turns the classic story almost becomes the original comic
    book, the character of Gwen, a new Spiderman, which I must admit, I have a lot more hook that, although good-natured, soseras Tobey. And many new surprises. But the main idea is that this reboot of the franchise, is a TOTAL facelift for the character, fresh air in the form of new faces, and what about the new suit ... SPECTACULAR. In an address with Marc Webb "500 days" as collateral, which is a relief. I would like to see this movie in the hands of a pseudo-Joel Schumacher. Finally, for fans of Spider-Man, mandatory viewing. And sure hope so, that anyone who values ​​and marvel comics, from the former to the latter, this movie will like, a lot.
    PD: Sorry but i'm spanish, and i use the traductor for this review.
    AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACHÚS
    http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5q7moV3Gk1qi89r1o1_500.gif
    Expand
  12. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    I'm very happy to say that the reboot of spiderman follows the comics much more firmly in the way spiderman developed his powers, the general storyline with him being inspired to be a hero, and the witty comedy directed at bad guys. With an ending some will hate and others will love, this spiderman movie may be the best of them all.
  13. Jul 3, 2012
    5
    A less involving remake of a movie that should have been left alone. While I think The Amazing Spider-Man did a fantastic job of representing Peter Parker, the rest of the movie just sort of flopped about, switching between humor and drama so abruptly and randomly, you are left wondering if you should be feeling sad or amused during scenes. The movie never really got going or got me as the viewer involved, so most attempts at drama failed. Additionally, the movie is incredibly long and drawn out, and I found myself wishing it would end.

    Don't get me wrong, the movie is not terrible. It is well made and well written. There's just... something about it that makes it very distant from the viewer. It took too long to get going and even then never really established itself.
    Expand
  14. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    The Amazing Spider-Man is as stylish and slick as it is emotionally grounded in the world we live in. Director Marc Webb takes the superhero genre and doesn't try to make it larger than life. Instead, he makes it down to Earth, in a way that Joss Whedon couldn't do with The Avengers and in a way that Christopher Nolan couldn't do with The Dark Knight. Spider-Man is back.
  15. Jul 6, 2012
    8
    Right off the bat, The Amazing Spider-Man is the best out of all four Spider-Man movies released so far. The key positive aspect of Mark Webb's reboot and what Sam Raimi failed to achieve with his franchise is remain faithful to the comic books. All of Peter Parker's iconic moments is still intact, the inevitable spider bite, uncle Ben's death, the first time he dons the realistic-looking suit, it's covered in greater detail and you don't feel the Expand
  16. Jul 3, 2012
    7
    Five years after the last Raimi Spider-man film which was an utter disappointment comes The Amazing Spider-Man to bring the hero back into gear. But is it better than its predecessors? The answer is yes and no. The Amazing Spider-Man shows a new Peter Parker, who instead of a nerd, is actually a chill hipster dude who skateboard. Yeah, um that's not who Peter Parker is supposed to be. But putting that aside, Spider-man was almost perfectly done. One-liners and just taken in a plain humorous sense in some parts of the movie. But, the movie did try to get serious in many scenes like when Uncle Ben dies and that part was actually well done and creates more emotion to Peter's and his uncle's relationship which wasn't so strong in 2002's Spider-Man. The origin story has been told before but this one was well done to say the least. The Lizard looked weird and honestly, didn't even look like a lizard. The action in this movie is really well done also because the camera follows Spidey really well and Andrew Garfield did a decent job as his role. Emma Stone is perfect as Gwen Stacey, probably even better than Garfield as Peter Parker/Spider-man. She is much more of a likable character than Mary Jane ever was in the previous movies. This movie was far from being AMAZING but it sure was pretty fun to watch and all Spidey fans should check it out and give it a chance. Expand
  17. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    The Amazing Spider-Man, above all else, has heart. If you take away the brilliant acting of the main characters in Amazing Spider Man you're left with a far grittier and human take on the webslinger's story. Gone from this reboot is the campiness of the Raimi/Macguire rendition - replaced with the believable awkwardness of an adolescent dealing with something much bigger than himself. Fortunately, we don't have to take away the tremendous job of Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. While the supporting cast was largely terrific in their roles, Garfield and Stone slipped into their roles flawlessly. I had mixed expectations going with how Garfield would do, but any doubts were quickly quelled. Garfield's unbelievably awkward and emotional performance was believable - a commodity in most super hero flicks - without coming across as the typical whiny protagonist. Stone, once again, knocked it out of the park as Gwen Stacey playing showing true chemistry with her nerdy counter part. The story wasn't fantastic, but very serviceable give the need to once again delve into the origin of the arachnid hero. However, the dialogue was fairly good throughout but truly shined in parts. I would love to dive deeper and deeper into this, but the bottom line is The Amazing Spiderman is a very good movie and borders on great when firing on all cylinders. Webb has set a solid foundation in place to get the most out of his new franchise. I can only hope that, like most super hero series, we won't have to suffer through diminishing returns. Expand
  18. BKM
    Jul 5, 2012
    5
    Reboots are all the rage these days (I suspect we'll have an Avengers reboot at some point) so it's not surprising that the Spider-Man franchise has been torn apart and rebuilt with a new director, cast and villain. But was it really necessary to start from scratch so soon? While that can be debated, the film itself is a letdown thanks in large part to its attempts to present a darker and hipper Spidey than we are accustomed to. Peter Parker rides a skateboard? He barely even has to try to win the affections of Gwen Stacey? None of this feels true to the web slinger's roots. But the biggest problem is that Marc Webb and his creative team haven't made the franchise their own. Ultimately The Amazing Spider-Man feels too carefully plotted out and safe when it needs to take risks and find its own identity. Expand
  19. Jul 7, 2012
    5
    Overly-erratic and not developed enough to surpass a two-hour runtime. Andrew Garfield has nothing to work with as Peter Parker and he never gets to develop his character as Spider-Man due to spontaneous action sequences. Oh, and the trailers are misleading. No new information is doled out in this movie about Parker's parents, they didn't even develop that story save for a 10-second teaser in the end credits.

    Not necessarily bad, just completely forgettable.
    Expand
  20. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    It was truly amazing. I love the first 2 Spider-man movies, so I'm glad the new spider-man franchise started that good. Great performances, effects and action, and the best 3D since Avatar.
  21. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie truly is amazing. It really is one of the best superhero movies I have ever seen. I disagree with what the critics are saying by giving it a measly 67 out of 100. I like that this movie stays more true to the original comics that it is based on. Spider-Man is now more of a wise-cracker, making jokes in a dangerous situation (unlike the Spider-Man of a certain other film trilogy I know). I also like that the story is darker, and less romantic (unlike a...oh scratch it you know the drill). The main villain is now not a true villain, but a guy who wants something back. This is what makes it so much more original than a lot of the other superhero movies, whose villains are filled with anarchy. The CGI is excellent. The Lizard (main villain) might be up to the level of how Davy Jones and Gollum looked in their respective films. There is only one real problem that I have with this film. Towards the end where Lizard is about to take over the city by turning everyone into reptiles, he intoxicates some S.W.A.T. team people by turning them into lizards like himself. However, these people do not help the lizard at all in the rest of the film. This leaves a plot hole in which you don't know what they did from there. You only see them changing back into their human form at the very end. This plot hole does not change my opinion on this movie however. To me it is still an excellent film, and I cannot wait for the sequel! Expand
  22. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    Lets just say, i wasnt expecting much from this move from the start. But holy cow was i wrong. I was sure Toby McGuire was the only one that could play Spider Man that good but Andrew Garfield was spectacular as well as the other actors. The action was more intense than the originals. The movie made me laugh, feel sad, had me in awe, just an amazing movie. Easily my favorite of 2012 so far and now we'll see what Batman brings to the table July 20th. Expand
  23. Jul 4, 2012
    4
    I don't care about the reboot. This is just a tremendously mediocre movie. Incredibly poor pacing and a weak script. Shame, because all the actors are game and most of the CGI is well-done. The second half of the movie descends into the ridiculous, the characters other than Peter Parker are written so lifeless and one-note. I thought there was plenty enough to distinguish this from the last franchise, but I think it's very fair to compare them if you give this one a fair shake standing on its own. This movie, however, does not stand well on its own, Ironically, this one apparently stayed more true to several of the details of the comics but lacks any of the energy and wonder of a comic book. The first movie of the last series had this is spades. Just a really disappointing effort, and the first recent Marvel movie I disliked more than I liked. Expand
  24. Jul 4, 2012
    1
    This film was boring, drab and there was no real adventure. The first half sucked. Nothing to write abt villain. A superhero movie needs an equally strong and emphatic villain. This movie lacked that.
  25. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    This is a much more human spider-man, he felt like the geeky Peter Parker with his actions and his position in school as well as his body language and communication with people including his love interest Gwen, He underwent a more natural development of his powers as well as emotional growth over the course of the film for given reasons. Unlike the Toby McGuire counterpart, He also had a sense of humor which is one of Spider mans strong points as that made him one of my all time favorite marvel characters. The villain for this film was also much more menacing than any of the enemies the original Spider man movies ever had, The character behind the lizard was unfortunately not as interesting as the rest of the cast though. The combat sequences were excellent with very impressive CG visual effects(minus the face he actually looked like the goomba from Mario Bros the movie.) They did an incredible job in emphasizing Spider Mans agility and use of the web during his battles, and again his witty lines never fail to further keep him consistent to his comic book self.

    I gotta say with all the down talk this movie is getting i was a bit worried myself about on whether or not it would be worth watching, but after seeing it, i actually wouldn't mind a second run if the opportunity arises, It is a great movie.
    Expand
  26. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    Dont even bother reading the extremely negative reviews. I was very skeptical going in, but what a hell of a start for a new trilogy. The best part about this fresh start, is the 'darker' direction Sony decided to roll with. And as for Garfield, I'm actually surprised at his performance. Any true Marvel fan will appreciate this movie. Well done. Can't WAIT for the Venom tie in.
  27. Jul 5, 2012
    10
    Gone is the de facto essence of the original Sam Raimi series that captivated crowds with its webby charm. In fact, some may say that the story of Peter Parker's meteoric rise to superhero status has already been beaten to death and the Spider-Man name is better off succumbed to cobwebs; but, lo and behold, something amazing has emerged in its wake since we last caught up with our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man. Yes, arachnophobes rejoice, because there's nothing more to be afraid of. The Amazing Spider-Man may initially come across a sort of tumorous growth next to the already existing Spidey movie franchise, but what it does do, it does web-free. Swipe the whole 'radioactive spider' thing away and proceed to stomp all over it with relent as you may, what you'll discover is a movie that's not been built around the device of a magical creepy crawler that goes and turns the world upside down with an infectuous little bite, but a movie that plays off of this ludricous idea of eight-legged heroic origin beautifully. With that in mind, go see The Amazing Spider-Man. You won't be disappointed. Oh, and let me add that the little romance which goes on between Andrew Garfield (Peter Parker) and Emma Stone (Gwen Stacy) is not annoying, but stirring...not to mention that the director's last name is Webb. Expand
  28. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    It is a great film filled with human emotion and multiple conflicts. Webb makes a film more worried about characters then action. This is not to say that the action scenes are not masterfully crafted and beautiful looking. These characters are dear to us similarly to the ones of 500 days of summer. The only other super hero movies to have the same effect is Nolan's Batman series. You know that when you can compare a film to Nolan's Batman series it is a great film and this one is the best of the year so far. Expand
  29. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Last year X-Men (First Class)reboot was very fantastic, and The Rise of the Planet Apes was also very good! This year, Marc Webb dared to begin another Spider-Man Franchise, and to my surprise; was amazingly done.Not as good as Batman Begins but is as good as last year X-Men: First Class.

    Fresh and old plot-lines were mixed up to gave the audience an exquisite story of old-brand new spidey hero. Again, heroism brand of spider-man focus on his relationship to his family, friends and peers, and of course our superhero is one-hell of a lover-boy; new love interest which an ingredient of fresh story and is a sample exploits an untold story which I think the major flaw of the movie because it doesn't elaborates the secret behind his parents death which I hope can be lighten to us the next spidey-movie.

    Overall, Andrew was great to replicate what Tobey done and Emma and other cast were good. The story maybe a shadow of the Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Franchise but is still effective enough to let you bite. Action and web-slinging choreography and other visual effects were great even the background music, especially Coldplay's "Till Kingdom Come" track.
    Expand
  30. Jul 3, 2012
    3
    Wow. It's pretty bad. It barley held my interest. I found myself at times wishing it was over. The kid that plays spiderman has one of those faces you just want to punch...like Jamie Oliver. The tree points I gave it went to the cgi which was really good. The subplot about his parents it totally unnecessary, but maybe they have something big planned. Reminded me of a direct to dvd spiderman movie.
  31. Jul 3, 2012
    8
    I just finished watching this film, and I have to say that I really enjoyed myself. Here are some good things about the film: Webbs' version of Spider-Man was more faithful to the comics. Spider Man felt more agile and fast than Sam Raimi's version and was more easier to follow in his action scenes, also the chemistry between Peter and Gwen is spectacular as Garfield and Stone gave good performances. Although they didn't have to repeat Spiderman's origins again, they tried to change it up a little and they succeeded in doing it. The Lizard also made a good villain and Rhys Ifans was convincing as both Dr Connors and his alter ego. And here are cons of the movie: The action sequences of the film was definitely not on par as with Raimi's Spider-man films, especially Spider-Man 2's train fight scene. Although the action was good and easy to follow, they were kind of short. The action scenes lasted 2 minutes tops and some even less, although they are quite frequent during the second half of the film. Overall, it was a great film that provided more closure to Parker's origins and also was a subtle coming-of-age film that showed Parker's change of character from a nerdy high school student, to a morally-driven hero. I give this film an 8 out of 10. Expand
  32. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Everything about this movie is better than and more creative than any Spider-Man movie before it. Andrew Garfield is a fantastic Parker and a superb Spider-Man. Definitely Amazing!
  33. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    The Amazing-Spider Man surpasses the original trilogy. The cast was well-chosen and they all give a lot of credibility to the characters. Andrew Garfield nails Spidey! So, great character development. The action sequences were great. The Lizard is just vicious, they could have added a bit more of humanity to the character while as Dr. Connors, but in the end they still did a better and more believable villain than the previous trilogie did, with the exception of Spider Man 2. I thought the CGI effects showed how a man would actually look if it turned into a lizard, and having the snout in the head didn't matter, I think it would give some sort of crocodilish/dinossaur look to him. They provides us great humour, they don't overuse it like in Raimi's films, offering a much more emotional and "darker" side of the story. Overall I give it a 9 just because they could have showed a bit more humanity to Dr. Connors, a moment with his kid or wife before the transformation but still he is a believable villain as the Lizard, and I like the fact it alters his persona. Expand
  34. Sep 23, 2012
    3
    The worst movie and marvel that ever seen! This film does nothing more than fill scenes without inportancia (leftover). The biggest star of the movie is boredom.
  35. Jul 3, 2012
    2
    I dont even know where to start. The acting was very poor and this is just a reboot, It had no comparison to the previous Spider Man movies. The originals were the best. This new cast never gives you any feeling for the good or the bad people. Had SI FI which I dont like for the most part but it just didnt fit in with this movie, which is like watching a B rated movie. Maybe it is, any way..............The actors look like they are reading off of Q cards. You dont get the sense of feeling towards themselves that people get when they are in love with there partner. Advice: wait till it comes out on tv or a Premium movie Chanel you may have. Don't waste you money.There are so many things wrong with this movie im just going to stop. Expand
  36. Aug 1, 2012
    1
    I was skeptical as much as many people when I heard that Colombia Pictures was rebooting a franchise that was no more than a decade old. Nonetheless, I went in with an open-mind and judged this film from the perspective as both a reboot and on it's own merits. All I can say is this movie is amazing...amazingly underwhelming. That is not to say this movie is not without it's positives. The cast is generally well-rounded (Andrew Garfield really pours his soul into the role), the chemistry between the two romantic leads is very solid, and the action is well-choreographed, with tight cinematography to boost. The core issue with this movie is lies within the script and execution. One opportunity that this reboot sorely missed is the movie doesn't take the chance to stick closer to the comic book source material. Not only does it deviate more from the source material than the Raimi trilogy but the filmmakers go for a Nolan-Batman-esque dark tone by making Peter Parker an emotionally damaged teenager. This feels completely out of place since Spider-Man is supposed to be comical and wisecracking. Parker sometimes does wisecracks but it is so sporadic that it only ends up making his character confusing. Spider-Man is not Batman, the writers tried to put elements into a character that simply don't fit. Another huge misstep was in the villain plot, which features The Lizard. Not only is the motivations of the character confusing and seem to change on the fly, but he also looks like a combination between Killer Croc and a Goomba. Halfway through it becomes obvious that The Lizard is simply another Norman Osbourne/Green Goblin villain except not nearly done as well. Plus the script is so full of plot conveniences and half-baked elements that it truly feels like this script was subjected to many rewrites. Seeing this film, it seemed obvious that the filmmakers were trying to combine the dark brooding tone of the Nolan Batman franchise along with the high-concept sci-fi elements of the Avengers franchise and none of them seem to mesh nor are they executed with the same quality as those film's. I predict that this film is going to be the 'Superman Returns' of the Spider-Man series, a complete misfire of a reboot that fails to bring any fresh momentum to the franchise. This is definitely the weakest Spider-Man movie, even weaker than 'Spider-Man 3' (I never thought that could be possible). Expand
  37. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Please don't listen to reviewers bashing this because it's a reboot. It's leaps and bounds above Raimi's films. Trust me....this is the real deal. It's a wonderful adaptation, and one of the best superhero films ever made. Better than The Avengers.
  38. Jul 13, 2012
    1
    Just bloody awful. Horrible, in fact. And I usually can some redeeming qualities in superhero movies. Supergirl anyone? Emma Stone was blank and vacant. In fact I've seen wallpaper that was more interesting and talented. She's the next go to girl? Really? Poor Sally Field. After this I don't think she'll be shouting, "you like me, you really like me". She's so talented and so wasted in this. It wasn't the actors fault. There was no character development. No caring about our protagonist. In fact, I was hoping at one point Christian Bale's Batman would come in, growling and cape and cowl flowing, and shoot Garfield in the head. Again, not the actor's fault. Just horrible. Awful and a waste of time. McGuire's Peter Parker was much, MUCH, better. Expand
  39. Fin
    Jul 13, 2012
    3
    You want to waste 2 hours of your life, then watch this movie.This movie is so boring, there is almost no action into it. The development of Parker is damn weak. You should watch this movie only if you're a teen, because there's no essence in it. This movie is way worse than the Spider-Man movie of 2002, not saying that one was a good one but it was watchable.

    Simply put, don't watch it
    and you'll do something more constructing with your time Expand
  40. Jul 14, 2012
    0
    This movie was clearly written for a tween audience, to whom the characters and their motivations may pass as those of regular 17-year-olds, however to anyone with an iota of taste or sensibility this movie is shown for what it truly is - a soap opera with badly tacked-on action scenes. As a long-time reader of the spider-man comics and literature (including the Ultimate series, on which this movie is clearly based), it was almost as painful to watch Garfield's over-the-top and egotistical approach to Spider-man as it was to watch his laughable attempt to stir up emotions in the viewers (whether it be laughter or empathy). Although I do appreciate and commend the director for attempting to add Spidey's wit and humour in his action scenes (as is common in the books and an element the previous movies lacked), they unfortunately seemed to be more mean-spirited than the lighthearted, witty attitude Spidey exhibits in the books. Over all the character was badly interpreted, the surrounding characters were one-dimensional and the story was a mind-numbing bore. Throughout the movie, I found myself hoping the action segments would help resuscitate my interest - however even they were illogical and badly designed to the point where I could not bother paying attention any more. In conclusion, a disappointing installment in the series which takes the character in an unfortunate direction - perhaps in an attempt to recreate the success of the darker Batman movies - which leaves old-time Spider-man fans wondering if this is still the character they've always known. Expand
  41. Jul 9, 2012
    7
    I enjoyed the first Raimi Spider-Man film (and hated the second one). At the time, with nothing to really compare them to, I thought Tobey and Dunst were solid enough, but after seeing The Amazing Spider-Man, I realize that there was real chemistry lacking between the original's leads. Garfield is much better than Tobey - Tobey's unaffected, bored look worked in The Cider House Rules, but not as Peter Parker. I buy Garfield much more as a high school kid, and Emma Stone is so much more dynamic than Dunst (who excels in such art house flicks as The Virgin Suicides and Melancholia - but not in the popcorn / comic flick realm). Even the antagonist is much more believable and even sympathetic in the right ways. All-around, I think this is the best big screen version of Spidey. No, it's nothing like the Batman Begins reinvention of that franchise, but it's still superior fare. Expand
  42. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A huge step forward for Spiderman as an integral character in the Marvel movie universe. Only two things I didn't like were 1.) Parker's nonchalant attitude when receiving new powers. Dare I say good ole droopy-face Tobey had better writing on suddenly receiving crazy, life-changing powers.The new movie simply glazes over this part with a series of "teenager growing up" hijinx. 2. The cranes. I know there had to be some way to make more drama as Spidey swings to the Oscorp tower, but this is really an unfortunate way to include normal everyday people in the mix with Spidey. The beauty of Spiderman in NY is that most of the people he saves never have any other impact on his life. So this random dude, who had his kid rescued, just happens to have the connections at that one moment to get everyone on a crane in (no time)? Sorry, but even a heightened sense of disbelief won't save that scene. Defintely not the best superhero movie of the summer (Avengers...so far) but a solid movie. Expand
  43. Jul 7, 2012
    10
    When I first heard that they were rebooting Spiderman with stars Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, and that it would be directed by Marc Webb, I was pretty excited. Once I stepped into the theatre, I was ringing with anticipation. And when the movie ended, I was speechless. Yes, this may sound dramatic, but to me, "The Amazing Spider-Man" exceeded my expectations in every single way and completely blew me away. It easily and instantly became one of my favorite movies, and I can't wait to see it again. Here's why: first, I loved the mysterious back story involving peter and his father, which drew you in from the minute the movie began and left you wondering as the movie ended. I was also a huge fan of the Lizard, a slithering, misunderstood villain whose action-packed battles with Spidey were thrilling to watch. Thirdly, and most importantly, the two main characters (Garfield and Stone) stole the show, in my opinion. Not only were their acting and character portrayals superb, but the chemistry between the two actors was so undeniably genuine that I felt as though I was experiencing every emotion along with them. Director Marc Webb, who made another favorite film of mine, (500) Days of Summer, proves that although he may not have the most extensive background in film making, he most definitely has the talent to make heartfelt, interesting and fun films, to say the least. I am absolutely obsessed with "The Amazing Spider-Man" and eagerly anticipate its sequels. Expand
  44. Jul 12, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Although making a reboot of a movie that was released 10 years before is absurd, I'm not going to complain about it because you knew that long before going to the movie and I believe it's not fair. However, because it was directed by Marc Webb and featured great stars (Emma Stone, Andrew Garfield, Sally Field) I must say I expected the movie to be more emotional and more character-developed than the old Spider Man movie. I must say I was wrong. Other than Peter Parker (which had a coming-of-age period that was interesting) the characters seem one-note. And it is such a shame because we all know that both Emma and Sally Field has great acting skills. Another problem in the movie was it's villain. The whole lizard thing was weird (him wanting the whole human population to be a lizard). Also, Andrew Garfield's spider man ego didn't match with Peter Parker, and while Spider man was fighting I completely felt that I was watching someone else. The length of the movie also made me killed myself and even Emma Stone with the umbrella couldn't save the extremely unnecessary love scenes. We know that there is going to be a sequel to The Amazing Spider Man. And I know that the only thing that will save that movie is Marc Webb's creativity that we didn't see in this movie. I except something like Expectations-Reality scene from 500 Days of summer in the next movie. Expand
  45. Jul 18, 2012
    7
    This movie is good fun. Lots of action, fighting, etc as you would expect from a Spiderman film. If you like Spiderman you should like this movie, if not, then why not?!?!
  46. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    This film was excellent. Superb acting, on par with the comics, very emotional, and 'amazing' action. Garfield puts Tobey to shame. The film was tainted by over-marketing though, a mistake I pray Sony does not commit again.
  47. Jul 9, 2012
    7
    İf u ask me why 7 but not 10 i can state that main problem is Connors. He is good, i mean lizard is cool. but it is like a weaker copy of hulk. Even when it acts and fights. oh the other hand both avengers and reboot spider man's budget is 220 million. but look at the difference, Avengers action scene's are more incredible and lasts at least 30 minutes more than spider man. and cast is perfect, then for what producers spent 220 million. and where is the j,j? spider-man without his raging boss doesnt seem warm, as a movie it is good and watchable, some lacks of screenplay wounded and hardly walking spider at the end fight even doesnt feel his injuries. my points are 7-marc webb 9-andrew garfield 9 emma stone 6-screenplay 8-visual effects 10- stan lee's cameo:) Expand
  48. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    It's a good movie, not perfect, but entertaining as hell. The Amazing Spider-Man is as good as Raimi's "Spider Man" (Not as good as "Spider Man 2"), but it is certainly more angsty and smaller in scope.

    If you're ok with that, then prepare for a Marc Webb experience :)
  49. Jul 5, 2012
    10
    For those of us that grew up with the comics and eventually the cartoon series, you can imagine how disappointed we were when we saw all the things spiderman screwed up, the Green Goblin being enhanced like he was a main bad guy and venom getting a solid kill count of 1 before spiderman defeats him. On top of all that Sam Raimi mixed some of his own personal struggles as a youth with Tobi Mcguire. It was as if he was doing to spiderman what George Lucas was doing to Darth Vader.
    Webb comes along and completely brings truth to the series, captures the Lizard perfectly and defines a spiderman who is bright like his father and shows that he's actually quite vulnerable a hero. He doesn't shoot webbing out of his hands all weird. He actually builds the devices to launch webbing that was developed by his fathers corporation (why spiderman is often considered batmanesque, he's actually quite smart and designs things). I still tip my hat to Raimi, as he brought the series to the silverscreen for the first time & such a movie wouldn't have been done so well if it wasn't for him. Hopefully like Batman we'll get to see the series expand just don't bring in the green goblin, the hobgoblin is much more powerful and actually remains the same person throughout the series.
    Expand
  50. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    The Amazing Spider-Man is, as I said in the title, an excellent restart to the story. The acting, visuals, and story were all well-done and VERY enjoyable to watch. Speaking of the acting, Stone and Garfield were both a great joy to watch on film, mostly because they have this great screen chemistry and I can't wait to see them at it again in the next one (If there is one). This movie is very enjoyable and fun to watch, and I recommend any one of any age to go see this! I saw it in IMAX 3D, and not that I think it is the best way to see it or anything, but I thought it looked amazing on the IMAX screen so I recommend checking that out if you have the means to as well. Expand
  51. Jul 3, 2012
    7
    Different twist in building an origin of the superhero, some emotional scenes and new swinging action of the skinny Spiderman is not enough to wipe out Tobby Maguire Spiderman image from your head. Though exciting fun is there to make people come to cinema and I watched in a full packed Hall. Complete review @ http://bit.ly/KK1QuK
  52. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    Is it amazing? In terms of grasp on character, yes it sure is, from peter parker or his alter ego all the way to a small part like flash thompson, every character gets a little defining character moment to show their a real human being not a dumb stereotype. Is the action amazing? Very nearly its strong but needs a little work though one scene in slow mo in a library is both greatly choreographed and hilarious. Special effects are mainly very good, the lizard for the most part becomes a very believable creation you believe he's dr connors and the most amazing thing is that even when he's talking It dosent seem weird it makes more sense to the character. Their are flaws but mainly their nit picks. He way this film makes you believe and want to cheer for the love, the relationships, the action is just fantastic, this is a foundation which an amazing sequel could be built upon. Expand
  53. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    Let me start with a little background before I get stuck into The Amazing Spider-Man. Now, I was a massive fan of Sam Raimi
  54. Jul 7, 2012
    8
    Anyone who actually knows anything about Spider-Man would understand this is better than the original. Andrew Garfield's wry sense of humor and character out of costume is more on par with the likes of Spider-Man in every sense. Emma Stone is immediately likable and her chemistry with Garfield is great. We were practically forced to like Kirsten Dunst and most of the scenes between her and Maguire were more painfully awkward than enjoyable. Expand
  55. Jul 12, 2012
    8
    The movie is pretty good. The storyline is great and not much of the basics change from the original film. I like the fact that Merry Jane is not in the movie and Andrew Garfield is relly good. There are both action and funny scenes and there is the romance element as well.. And most important there is a scene after the credits so stay and watch ;)
  56. Jul 20, 2012
    10
    This movie has exceeded all expectations i had for the movie. Having not read the comics as a kid and with the earlier trilogy being the only real connection i had to spider-man i am not comparing it so much to the comics and the previous trilogy. While this movie is more grounded and connected to the comics, the closer connection to the comics is not what makes this movie great for me--the fact that the movie is great is what makes this movie great for me. The acting is superb, as is the writing, and i was able to relate to the characters and feel that they were actual people. The plot kept moving and revisited the earlier events in Peter Parker's story in a way that was fresh enough to hold my attention, and keep me from getting bored. The action is fast, suspenseful, and sure to please. Over all this movie is fantastic! You really are missing out if you do not take the time to witness such a great film! Expand
  57. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    I liked Tobey's version when it came out, but now that I've seen Andrew's version, I think they raised the bar. Raimi's trilogy (at least at first) seemed to stick to the well-known origin story. This one modernizes it a bit and, understandably, they tried to stay away from comparisons to the original film as much as possible. I'm not crazy about all the changes, but I think they worked well. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy sells her role much better than Kirsten Dunst sold Mary Jane Watson. And I have to agree with reviewers who said the chemistry between the leads was much better in this version. I saw no problems with the CGI or effects. I think they were faithful to the characters of Uncle Ben, Curt Connors, and even Captain Stacy. There's an obvious back story they left unfinished so looking forward to more. Expand
  58. SFN
    Jul 7, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. best spider-man movie ever, period, Andrew plays a absolute perfect spider-man/ Peter Parker, the beautiful Emma stone is perfect for Gwen Stacy, people complain about how the movie takes awhile to get started and it does but only because their telling every detail that the others didn't mostly about Peter's parents, the acting is really good and the i was also impressed with the CG also, me being a spider-man fan and knowing everything there is to know about him this is a perfect film, all these people who say its no good are not real fans, this is a movie for actual spider-man fans not for everyone that goes and see's it, if your a fan you can't go wrong with this movie Expand
  59. Jul 5, 2012
    8
    Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone bound is undeniably charming. With sure-handed direction from Marc Webb, pull the memories of Raimi's trilogy. Spider-Man is only human being with spider bite, it's the most realistic but really close to its source. People complain about the 3D, so am I. But it's the agenda from the start, looks deeper.
  60. Jul 5, 2012
    3
    I watched it, and didn't think highly of it thinking back. It felt forced. As if they were trying to follow the story and at the same time give a new perspective on everything from what most of us know of the first Spiderman a few years back. The actors and actresses used didn't always fit the parts, just didn't feel smooth enough. The movie never sucked me into it as most shows and movies are suppose to do and most good ones do do to me. I am glad I got to see this movie at no cost. Expand
  61. Jul 18, 2012
    7
    I quite enjoyed this movie.The lead actor is far better than Toby Mquire in my opinion,& the film definately had its moments & it felt 'more real' in the way it was presented as opposed to the very bright & colourful look of the Sam Raimi films.I dont think the action was anywhere near as good as the Raimi films so far though,& no where near as much of it.Still,its only the first movie in this series,so theres room for improvment in this area in any sequels,of which i hope there are. Expand
  62. Jul 10, 2012
    1
    I hate Marc Webb for this movie. Sure, the acting was great, but directing and script are a failure. This isnt the true Spider-man. Spider-man is about power and responsibility, and this one is only about revenge.
    How come he be a true hero if hes not interested in saving inocent civilians. And ooh, how he loves to reveal his identity to everyone. Hes so weak he can't even dodge a BULLET.
    He has no Spider-Sense.
    And Webb's words that the movie is by the comics is a huge lie.
    Expand
  63. Jul 3, 2012
    6
    For a reboot, it was okay. The Lizard was okay, but I'm wondering if the producers knew that the Lizard was not that interesting in the comic version prior. The actor (Andrew Garfield) did alright while Spiderman, but while Peter Parker, makes me sad for the actor and I guess for young Peter. Aunt May is supposed to be about as innocent as a senior citizen in the big city can be; Sally Field honestly didn't fill the shoes as well as her predecessor Rosemary Harris (btw, I like Sally Field, this just wasn't her part). Emma Stone and her character were actually the bright lights of the casting. Even Martin Sheen (whom I love as an actor) didn't really add to or improve on the prior Ben Parker. Last note: The standard Marvel teaser at the end of the credits - total flop - did nothing to make me want to see any upcoming Marvel movies, did not whet my appetite for more ... nothing. Best thing about it was that it lasted perhaps a minute.
    If I knew then what I know now, I'd have saved the money and waited for DVD.
    Expand
  64. Jul 3, 2012
    8
    It wasn't a bad movie. Overall it was great. But the origin story was so boring. Its a story I've heard a million times over the years, and just 10 short years ago in the last spider-man movie. I wish they would have left out that part and focused more on either enhancing the rest of the movie, or adding in more.
  65. Sep 27, 2012
    7
    This new spidey flick, as of 2012...is a pretty decent film. Has a few mistakes, but not every film is perfect. Marc Webb seemed to have started this new franchise off with a good start. It is grossing quite well. 751 million worldwide as of September 2012. Though, it's not it's gross that matters. It's the value of the film. What it conveys to us fans. I believe that even though it was basically another version of Raimi's Spider-Man from 2002, it has a different storyline. For example, Gwen Stacy comes in as a main character, Uncle Ben is actually killed due to an attempt to stop a thief, the villain is the Lizard, the new suit, web-shooters, and the fact that Peter is a bit more **** this time. Though, he isn't bad. The only problem about this which may have not been such a big deal to other viewers, is that in some scenes, Spidey seemed to have "lost" his Spider-sense. For example, when he was tazed by a policeman near the end of the film, and when he was on a spider web in the sewers, and was suddenly attacked by the Lizard as if he was surprised. Overall, even though there were flaws, it's a great film to watch. I can't wait to watch the sequel which comes out in 2014, and well...That's the end of my review. Go Spidey! Expand
  66. Jul 7, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. As a comic book geek for the past 3 decades, I'm a little more critical than most. However, "The Amazing Spider-Man" gets some things right, comic book-wise, but gets a lot wrong. And from a movie perspective, it's really quite weak. Overall, it's an amazing, albeit expected, disappointment.
    First, let's talk about what The Amazing Spider-Man did right. Andrew Garfield's portrayal of Spider-Man and Peter Parker were very good. He was skinny, gawky, **** and funny. He WAS Ditko's Spidey. I loved him as much as I loved Tobey. And that is saying a LOT. They included his love and aptitude for science. His dialogue while dealing with common criminals was very accurate with a teenager given a little bit of power, yet not realizing the responsibility that comes with it. Painful lessons then ensued to bring said **** teenager back down to Earth. This interpretation of the teenage mind was actually better than the original trilogy. In addition, the creation of his web shooters being a product of Oscorp that he essentially weaponizes was a perfect modern take on them, and another improvement on the original trilogy. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy was absolutely adorable. Her strength, personality and sheer cuteness (even though I prefer the red hair...I have such a thing for red hair) complemented Andrew's portrayal well, especially as they interacted more and the story progressed.
    While I was hesitant about the Lizard as a primary villain, they wove him into the story so well that I was pleasantly surprised to find him so interesting. While Rhys Ifans did a great job as Dr. Connors was a much better selection for portraying the raging Lizard, I always liked Dylan Baker's Dr. Connors. The key to making the Lizard a suitable primary villain, though, was weaving him into a story with some depth, which they did. He was centralized very well with not only a reason to become the Lizard, but also a reason to tie him into Peter/Spidey. Also, fixing the problem they had with the portrayal of Venom, the Lizard was larger than life, ominous and a physically superior being to Spider-Man. Finally, while it took until end to finally see it, the last scene with Peter and Aunt May established a very good chemistry and character element to the overall story. I look forward to seeing this blossom in the future movies as it greatly exceeds the original casting by Raimi. At first I was concerned about May not being portrayed as old enough, but in the end, it worked.
    All of the good things above transpired in the second half of the film, which made me actually stay because, while I've only walked out of two movies in my life (Dune and the original Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles), this was very close to being my third. The first hour of The Amazing Spider-Man was mind-numblingly boring. I was not aware they were seriously going to redo and/or retell his entire origin. The "untold story" required it, apparently. For those who love the ACTUAL origin story and loved the way Raimi told it, this was a kick to the crotch. It was insulting. It was unnecessary. It was so very badly done. It, frankly, ruined the movie for me. I think there was a way to weave the actual origin into this without redoing it all. Next, the script. While the second half of the movie added meat to this new origin, which made the rest of the film tolerable, the dialogue was complete crap. As much as Andrew and Emma seemed good together, the dialogue between them tried repeatedly to screw it up. It was weak, fake and hard to watch. Completely unnatural for two people who appeared to have chemistry.
    Next, the directing. Direction in this film is clumsy, spotty and elementary. Some action scenes are good, some are choreographed and/or edited very poorly. The camerawork during the Emma/Andrew scenes meant to bring them together and have the viewer care about the relationship developing, misses the mark completely. Editing may be more at fault here, especially during action sequences, but the qualitative variance from scene to scene smack of a poorly directed film.
    In the end, while I am always a sucker for comic book movies, especially beloved ones like Spider-Man, nothing happened in The Amazing Spider-Man to warrant dumping Raimi and the original cast. As bad as some may have thought Spider-Man 3 was, this movie did absolutely nothing to prove this was the right direction in which to go. Yet, based on audience and critical reaction, as well as the press around the mid-credit surprise ending piece, two more movies have been announced to tell yet another trilogy. Hopefully this movie will improve over time as the story unfolds, but with Christopher Nolan's Batman/Dark Knight masterpieces and Raimi's original bar set, there is no reason this movie shouldn't have been able to stand on its own, independent of supporting story lines in later films.
    Expand
  67. Sep 17, 2012
    10
    Best Spider-man movie so far! The acting,special effects,Villain were all great and I can't wait to see the Green Goblin in the next movie. This will probably go down as one of the greatest movie franchises if they keep up the standard. 10/10
  68. Aug 11, 2012
    10
    Amazing is an understatement. As a Spider-Man fan, I have waited for my whole life to get the true definitive Spider-Man movie, and I have finally gotten it. Wonderful performances, thrilling action, incredible screen writing, perfect humor, and fantastic character arcs make Spider-Man one of the most entertaining, and personal, comic book movies of all time. This is a fantastic movie, one that everyone should see. Expand
  69. Jul 22, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Having watched the Spiderman trilogy, my expectations of The Amazing Spiderman were initially low. Reading into some early reviews of the movies, I felt unimpressed. Nevertheless, I decided to enter the theater with an open mind. What I got was unprecedented. I saw a movie that was spectacular, endearing,a film that actually made me care about the characters. Toby Maguire might as well have played a plank of wood sleeping in a field for three hours. Andrew Garfield brought something to the movie, that Raimi could never evoke from Maguire; flavor, a peculiar flair, that stimulates the movie, even when there is no action taking place. His character is rigorously researched, resembling the original Spiderman envisioned by Ditko and Lee. He brings humor to the table( albeit a bit cheesy). He is smart, dependable, and caring. He personifies the high-school geek, but brings to charm it. He encourages us to stand up to the bully. He is bold in the face of danger. He gets the girl. He is smart, both practically and theoretically.

    Then we see the dark dimension to the film. The dissonance in the family that leads to the poignant death of his Uncle. A scene that allows us to sympathize with the rebellious geek. We are offered a character with many dimensions, a flawed character, unlike the stereotypical heroes we are normally offered. The on screen relationship between Garfield and Stone is a pleasure to watch. The chemistry is bubbling between the pair. Including some memorable quotes and moving scenes. Trust, a quality long lost on our generation is exemplified in Stone's and Garfield's characters, when he reveals his true identity to her. The tension is augmented by the fact that Stone's father, Capitan Stacy, is actively hunting Spiderman. We see the overbearing father holds the same level of disapproval for Peter Parker as he does his altar-ego. The Down to earth nature of the film is best displayed through the blue collar, Uncle Ben, played by the veteran actor Martin Sheen. Sheen brings the intrinsic qualities of family love and togetherness to the movie. He is a man who has worked all his life. He can be tough on Peter but means well. He loves his wife, and is enraged when Peter fails to pick her up from a dangerous neighborhood. When Peter becomes disenchanted, he storms out. Uncle Ben follows, ending up in a dangerous area.Ironically, the danger Ben warns Peter about is the very thing that kills him. In the conclusion, we see the insightful text message sent to Peter, which urged him to come home that night. In a way Peter is faced with a unresolved guilt. He seeks vengeance, but revenge cannot satiate the hole his uncle's death leaves. I particularly loved the exploration of Peter's past. It gives us a greater character profile and helps us understand how he came to live with his aunt and uncle. The Lizard was a good villain no doubt, but I felt maybe his character should have had a bit more screen time. Overall, the atmosphere and the plot were good. Rounded off by a great cast. It has all the makings of a great movie. Bow down Mr Raimi 10/10
    Expand
  70. Jul 5, 2012
    9
    defiantly worth t least a seven out of ten. I thought that no super hero movie I saw would seem any good after watching the avengers, but this while not as god as the avengers, is still a decent movie, and in my opinion better than the original. It is a worthy contender for the dark knight rise, but I don't expect it will be as good as that will. I can't really be bothered to go into detail
  71. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    I thought the movie was...amazing (excuse the pun) unlike its predecessors it stayed true to the original storyline. Andrew Garfield did a good job and portrayed Peter Parker well enough. In 3D the experience was fantastic and i would certainly recommend it. The only negative i can say is that other characters seem to lack depth (perhaps there wasn't enough time). The best thing about this movie is the potential, there are several enemies that did not feature (Green Goblin, Venom) and there's enough in this series for at least 2 more films providing they're equally (or better) than the first film.
    As always it's a Marvel film DO NOT LEAVE IMMEDIATELY AT THE END.
    9/10
    Expand
  72. Jul 8, 2012
    4
    this movie was really slow for the first hour and then it got better andrew garfield has to be the worst actor i have ever seen play spider man he acts like he is on drugs half the time
  73. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    This film is Great. The character of Peter is less annoying and more realistic this time around thanks to the great acting of Andrew Garfield. The origin story is better and weighs down the movie less than the original outing. Although i loved the Green Goblin from the original film, the Lizard is by far a better antagonist, this is probably due to the performance given by Rhys Ifans. All in all this is a great superhero film, you couldn't ask for much more (apart for some more time before a reboot.) Brilliant Action, Brilliant character development/design and brilliant casting. Expand
  74. Sep 5, 2012
    8
    The Amazing Spiderman might just about live up to it's name. It is a definite step up from the stuffy Spiderman 3, but I don't think it quite reached the heights of Spiderman 1 and 2. The plot is similar to that of Spiderman 1, but it doesn't suffer because of this: as it moves along at quite a brisk pace to lead into Spidey's climatic battle with the Lizard. The Lizard was a good choice for the movie, as many people would not have heard of him before, but he is not quite distinguished enough from the Green Goblin for my liking (even though he is a different character his themes and actions are slightly too similar to those of the Green Goblin in Spiderman 1). The acting is good all round, and Andrew Gafield's Spiderman seems closer to the source material than Tobey Maguire's, pulling one-liners from every direction and appears more awkward as a person, which is a good thing. Now that they've got the back story over with they can really focus on a very exciting sequel, which I am very much looking forward in anticipation, 83/100. Expand
  75. Nov 12, 2012
    6
    Andrew Garfield pulls off Peter Parker with a lot more believability than Tobey Maguire. This isn't the best super hero movie by any stretch, but it's an entertaining 90 minutes. I'll probably even watch a sequel, something I never did with Maguire in the lead role.
  76. Jul 4, 2012
    8
    This movie is hard to talk about. The fact that it is really different from the Sam Raimi franchise was a plus for me because I personally didn't care about the previous franchise. So I gave this film chance because I knew that it would play off the original comics and I must say the "Amazing Spider-Man" amazed me. From the action sequences to the humor to the chemistry between Garfield and Stone was also pretty good. So see this movie in theaters and you shouldn't be disappointed. Expand
  77. Jul 7, 2012
    4
    I must say I'm disappointed. I've read a review, on one site I usually have similar opinions with, promising that it'll be an entirely different perspective on the spider man, new and refreshing, and had quite high hopes for this movie. However, it's nothing new at all, same story about becoming a hero, with all its melodramatic boring moments about dying family and so on. What's worse, the action is scarce and not especially entertaining. What I did like were those short 1st-person view moments, which were quite breathtaking. All in all, it's a mediocre superhero movie, which I wouldn't be afraid to miss. Expand
  78. Jul 4, 2012
    10
    The movie was very good overall, I enjoyed the movie a lot. The movie had elements based on the original Amazing Spider-Man comics (i.e. mechanical web-shooters), and had some elements from other comics such as Ultimate Spider-Man (Richard Parker and Dr. Connors). The story was great in my opinion and I think the cast was better too. Emma Stone fit the role of Gwen Stacy more than Bryce Dallas Howard or Kirsten Dunst, and Andrew Garfield played a perfect role of Peter Parker. Expand
  79. Jul 3, 2012
    10
    Obviously, this movie is based on the amazing spider-man cartoon that's new and that's why we won't see Mary Jane until the next movie; when aunt May thinks Peter needs a girl and so the neighbor happens to have a daughter [Mary Jane] and Aunt May introduces her to Peter. But I wonder how they are gonna do with the other girl [Stacy] that happens to fall in love with Peter after she failed a test and Peter becomes her tutor. Man, spidey is surrounded by too many girls now. Lets see, Gwen, Mary Jane, Stacey, and of course our favorite super hero that happens to have the same powers captain America has BlackCat.

    The amazing spider-man is an amazing movie with lots of action. I really like it. Although, Peter Parker seems to be revealing too much of his powers during this movie. If I had seen what happened in real life I would say, "he is definitely not human.' I mean seriously, the train, the basketball, will someone in the movie say, "oh this guy I met the other day is definitely Spider-man. But the way he was web swinging was awesome because I felt it was more than just swinging. There was jumping from wall to wall, there was spinning on the wall while a bunch of birds flew behind him (that was cool). And of course Lizards mouth could had been a lot bigger, like a crocodile's mouth. It would had been amazing to have seen spidey trying to keep the mouth open as his head is so close to it. The thing I love about spider-man the most is that he is the most fun super-hero to watch. Although some people say a giant or Hulk can kill spider-man and that he is really not that powerful. I think he is awesome because his powers are very limited. That's exactly what they did in this movie. They didn't make spider-man so powerful, otherwise he wouldn't be fun to watch. And even though people say hulk or a giant , that's not true. Why? Because spider-man is smart. I think something they should do in a next movie is make a stronger villain for the web-head. In the movie I would like to see spider-man play a dragon ball z video game so that he can learn a really good lesson I learned from that game: "When you depend too much on your strength, you leave yourself wide open.' And lets also include Black Cat so that we can have two super-heroes fighting side by side. I always love to have movie ideas because when I really enjoyed the movie I spend some time imagining the characters in my head and interacting with them. I've imagine myself with powers and creating funny moments in my head too.
    Expand
  80. Jul 4, 2012
    10
    I had my doubts when I first heard that they were rebooting Sam Raimi's beloved Spider-Man and opting for a "younger" cast but, after seeing what this new cast and crew are capable of I am glad they did. The Amazing Spider-Man delivers in every category. Raimi's Spider-Man was great but, it time to put that behind use. Go see The Amazing Spider-Man, it's awesome.
  81. Jul 4, 2012
    9
    I don't understand all of the hate for this movie it really is the oddest thing its almost as if we watched a completely different movie. I loved this movie and almost everything about it and before I start I am a very huge fan of the Raimi spider-man trilogy and always have been. I thought this just completely blew the first Spider-Man movie out of the water. Better everything, Better acting, Better direction, an overall better movie. I'm already super excited for the sequel. Collapse
  82. Jul 4, 2012
    0
    I dont even know where to start. The acting was very poor and this is just a reboot, It had no comparison to the previous Spider Man movies. The originals were the best. This new cast never gives you any feeling for the good or the bad people. Had SI FI which I dont like for the most part but it just didnt fit in with this movie, which is like watching a B rated movie. Maybe it is, any way..............The actors look like they are reading off of Q cards. You dont get the sense of feeling towards themselves that people get when they are in love with there partner. Advice: wait till it comes out on tv or a Premium movie Chanel you may have. Don't waste you money.There are so many things wrong with this movie im just going to stop Expand
  83. Jul 4, 2012
    1
    The Amazing Spider-Man is Sony pictures second trap to draw you back into theaters at top dollar to watch a freak show of them butchering this classic story into small disgusting chunks of it's former self. While I can not give away the context of the story it's straight forward that what Sony told originally in the first spider man trilogy of films that was true to the spider man saga, they have instead replaced with garbage bits of story twists simply for the sake of saying "oh this is something different. trust us it's not the same movie you paid for a few years ago." And to that respect it isn't the same movie as the Sam Remi films, it's something more disheartening and sad. Since i can't go into detail i will simply say if you are familiar with the spider-man canon and enjoy the story telling associated with the original work, do not see this film. It has nothing to do with the original spider-man comics we all know and love. it's a chopped up remix of non canon waste produced to sell tickets.The only enjoyable aspects of this film revolve around the action which not even Michael Bay could destroy, and Garfield as Peter Parker looks more familiar to the original Peter Parker that Steve Ditko illustrated.Those are weak points of enjoyment i was able to squeeze from this film. Sadly, This disastrous method of film production will continue as long as you purchase tickets to Sony licensed marvel films. Once the license is returned to marvel studios can we hope this fantastic timeless and beloved story can be told right. Go see something else it's not that hard. Or hell buy marvel comics. Expand
  84. Jul 4, 2012
    0
    Simply put, it was boring - all of it. The acting, the special effects, the same old storyline. Save your money folks. Go see the vampire killer Abe Lincoln. At least it was fun!
  85. Jul 6, 2012
    4
    What a complete disappointment. I wasn't really sure what to expect going in to the move, but it was decent at best. The graphics are really the only reason this deserves any high score. The story was so generic. It seems like his uncle dying had no effect on him what so ever. He was very **** and went right into attacks. He was not tactical at all. It felt so incredibly rushed. The story moves so quickly. He just gets the suit. It's like he pulled it out of his ass or something. This was a complete let down. The story is so generic and one-dimensional. I don't even know why they had him like cameras. They tried to make him some cool kid. He used the camera like one time and didn't use it any other time. The comedy was the only thing appealing. The fight scenes were very generic and predictable. He's a lazy, disrespectful, over-confident, teenager who happens to get abilities to climb on walls. It is also stupid how he has those little machines pushing out webs. It makes him so much more vulnerable. All you have to do is aim for those and he's as good as dead. Would not watch again. Expand
  86. Jul 7, 2012
    0
    Watched it, and it is in my opinion the worst Spider-Man movie there is. The movie is more focused on the emotional relationship between Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, there is not enough action it's all boring conversations and feelings. The actors looks way to old to be in high school. They also got Dr. Connors character all wrong, Connors wanted to maintain his human nature in the comic books, he didn't want to play a god. This Connors was very gloomy. Personally I think Andrew Garfield is a bad choice for Spider-Man, he looks like something that escaped Twilight, he doesn't look anything like a nerdy outcast. In the movie nothing about Peter's parents is really unveiled. I was looking forward to see the movie, I thought it was an interesting reboot, I liked the new costume and that they have gone back to the web shooters. But it was a great disappointment, I was hoping the Lizard could safe this movie but the villain was poorly made and nothing like I had expected.

    To me the best Spider-Man is and always will be Tobey Maguire.
    Expand
  87. Jul 8, 2012
    7
    wow amazing as we bring new characters and new story nothing to do with the previous spider man, the performances are good and convincing which makes it worthy of a superhero movie and a new generation of spider man
  88. Jul 12, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Anyone who like superhero films will probably like this one.The movie was over all good with superb acting by Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone.This is terrific reboot and I find this one much better than its predecessors.It has great scenes with comedy elements in it. Expand
  89. Jul 11, 2012
    5
    I had very mixed feelings for this film. I read the ultimate spider man comics, and had high expectations for this film to be based more on it. Which is kinda is and kinda isn't. I understand bringing in lizard man to introduce the new spider man. But the way they placed big events and brought characters in the movie I dont understand how they are going to make the second one good and especially making this series beat Sam Raimis spider man movies. This movie was ok, But throwing out main events out of the comic books and not following the story of how it should go, its going to end up like Sam Raimi's series. Bringing in Gwen Stacy and Her Father and killing her dad so quickly was a stupid idea. I just wish someone would actually follow a storyline for once. Expand
  90. Jul 15, 2012
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I saw a lot terrible mistakes in the film esp in the last part when lizard placed his hand that was holding spider man leg on his face,terrible mistakes and acting was extremely poor.... Fun to watch but terrible things and a spider that can't cast webs on his own is just bad.. really really bad...spider is stronger than lizard and he can't beat it...just bad Expand
  91. Jul 24, 2012
    8
    Marc Webb tackles Spiderman in The Amazing Spiderman. A bit presumptuous if you ask me to put the adjective Amazing in the title itself especially when you are basically one film old and taking over from Sam Raimi and have relative new comer Andrew Garfield donning the spandex unitard that Tobey Maguire wore while swinging across New York City. Does Webb rise to the challenge or does he fail. Does Andrew Garfield succeed where Tobey failed (in impressing me as spidey). Does Emma Stone as Gwen Stacey make a more compelling love interest for Spiderman than Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane Watson.
    Speaking of Marc Webb, I loved his 500 Days of Summer and his unusual approach to a "not-a-love-story". The comparisons to Sam Raimi are inevitable and there are even those are calling this as Spiderman 4 - It is not. This is Webb's human approach to the Spiderman lore. There is a lot more back story as Webb tries to establish the beginning and even the story before the beginning. Webb and his screenplay writer Vanderbilt have infused the story with a lot of humor and it helps you relate to peter parker/Spiderman that i found lacking in Raimi and Maguire's Spiderman often I felt Maguire came off as insufferable. And for someone whose first movie was a romantic comedy heavily reliant on music Webb packs a punch with the action sequences that would make Nolan proud.

    Andrew Garfield as a nerdy geeky bullied Peter Parker is charming and as Spiderman is a hero you feel like cheering for. Garfield tasted success with The social network and makes his mark as the masked vigilante. He transitions seamlessly between being a lost helpless orphan to being a radioactive-spider-bitten swinging super hero, a bullied nerdy geeky high-schooler to Emma Stone kissing teenager. Andrew Garfield makes geek chic and makes the unitard sexy. Maybe he is too tall to be Spiderman but I'll take him over Tobey
    Expand
  92. Jul 25, 2012
    9
    This is the best spiderman movie yet!! The characters, plot, cgi, acting and the fact that Tobey Maguire isn't spiderman anymore is what makes The Amazing Spider-Man better than Sam Raimi's spiderman movies and this one follows the comics unlike before.
  93. Dec 25, 2012
    8
    I'm not a Spider-Man fanboy for life, but I have some pretty average background with the franchise. I loved the Amazing Spider-Man Animations Series of the 90s and also own a bunch of Spider-Man comic books. What I can say is, that this movie reminds me much more on the memories and style and story of the Spider-Man I know from my childhood than the last Trilogy by Raimi (which I didn't like that much). A lot of people seem to dislike the new movie, but in my eyes it is far superior to the raimi-trilogy when it comes to lore, comic-book feeling and 80s / 90s atmosphere. But maybe I'm not the best reference as I tend to dislike a lot of modern superhero movies. Expand
  94. Mar 10, 2013
    8
    It has all element a good entertaining superhero movie needs. A good plot with nice performances. Its more thought provoking than Sam Raimi's Spider-Man.
  95. Mar 16, 2013
    10
    The Amazing Spider-Man directed by Marc Webb is a fantastic reboot to the Spider-Man franchise. Despite having a similar plot line to Sam Raimi's 2002 Spider-Man, Webb's interpretation created a darker and more serious tone that established a story arc. Starting with the cast, Andrew Garfield's portrayal of Peter Parker did well to show the struggles of not only losing his uncle but not knowing the fate of his parents. We see that with Tobey Maguire's performance but it is eclipsed by the lighter tone of the 2002 movie. Garfield's portrayal also has more chemistry with his primary love interest, providing for a more intimate and youthful subplot complementing the already mentioned dark tone. Kirsten Dunst's performance resembled a summer blockbuster aimed at teenagers. Despite the common view that Raimi used a better supporting cast with James Franco, William Dafoe, and JK Simmons, it is very difficult to ignore the on screen presence of Sally Field, Martin Sheen, Rhys Ifans, and Denis Leary. One standout performance that was not mentioned was that of Irrfan Khan. Though he does not have a lot of screen time, Khan's performance added to the tone and complemented Dr. Connors transformation into the Lizard. The CGA and visual effects do provide for thrilling and captivating viewing experience but since the two movies were made a decade apart, it is difficult to praise one over the other owing to the vast advances in computer technology. One visual aspect that the comic fan base debates is the suit. The Raimi suit had a very strong resemblance to the comic and cartoon series. Webb's artistic team provided a new suit that allowed Spider-Man to look more athletic and agile. The darker toned fabric with a worn surface gave it a more realistic look. The only major mystery that created a plot hole was how does a high school kid create such a suit on his own in his bedroom. Overall "The Amazing Spider-Man" was a pleasurable film that undoubtedly surpassed its 2002 counterpart. The cast along with the plot and the visual presentation generated the interest and anticipation for a sequel. Expand
  96. Jul 17, 2012
    0
    This movie is a **** I don't think that this is better than the Sam Raimi's trilogy, which has better enemies and better actors. I don't like the villain of this movie, and Garfield is not a good spiderman.
  97. Jul 12, 2012
    6
    The Amazing Spider Man is good, but not quite amazing. This is do on par with the fact that it has a lot to live up to after the almost perfect trilogy brought by director Sam Raimi. Expectations at least from my part were all too short given that I really enjoyed those last films, and while this reboot didnt really satiate me completely, I did for a fact enjoyed watching it. The first problem with the film is that it is doomed to repeat what we already know. For the first half an hour, Spideys obligatory build up before becoming the hero we know is revisited, and that includes Peter being bitten by a spider and Peter watching his uncle Ben being murdered. The director seemed aware of the issue as the scenes are given some new twists, and also seemed to resume everything as quick as possible, but this overall make them feel uneventful. Once that is overcome, the movie starts opening some interesting elements, as well as some interesting characters. Emma Stone as Gwen is great to give an example. Actions scenes are quite nice ,but I dunno if as memorable as other heart pumping scenes from the first three, like per say: the train sequence in Spiderman 2. The soundtrack is OK but at the end pretty forgettable and really falls short to the outstanding soundtrack from the hexed trilogy before it. At the end, perhaps "The Amazing Spider Man´s" most unselfish but unfortunate fate is that it going to be compared to Sam Raimi´s work, and it is from that perspective that it falls short in some and other aspects. It is a good movie to watch with great characters, fighting scenes, music and actor performances, but all of that was also done (and in some ways even better) with the first line of movies and this calls into question if it was really necessary to start all over again. Expand
  98. Dec 9, 2012
    9
    A superb Spidey film, as good as Spiderman 1+2 I thought, if not a little better. Just an all round good film and exactly what you want it to be. The 'web shooting machines (can't be bothered to google technical term) on his wrists are a geeky and therefore pleasurable addition. How couldn't you enjoy seeing a pink flash every time he fires a web?
  99. Jul 26, 2012
    6
    Its been a mere decade since Sam Raimi helmed Tobey Maguire (as twenty-something Peter Parker) and company together to set the modern standard for the webslinging hero. As the first two films experienced both commerical and critical success, it's understandable as to why the latest project, The Amazing Spider-Man may strike some fans as being "too soon." But, such popular wisdom didn't halt the 500 Days of Summer director Marc Webb from attempting to prove the nay seyers wrong. Challenged with the prospect of following 2002's Spiderman, this Spidey-film, in production, suffered from the sole disadvantage of being a subsequent act: avoiding semblance. Being a remake, however, involves at least some similarity. In any regard, the film succeeds in distinguishing itself largely due to the new Peter Parker, Andrew Garfield. Known for his spotlighted performance in The Social Network, Garfield assumes a modernized persona in 'Spider-Man.' He, though playing a bit older of a teenager than did Maguire in his debut, is instantly accepted in his role, having a fresh-faced innocence framed with anxious tics, angst, wry humor, and an unpretentiously down-played charisma that realistically reflects towards today's youth. Moreover, unlike the hackneyed "nerdy" image Maguire attained, Garfield is a punkish, skateboarding, internet-surfing, texting teen who just feels right; factor in the tall, lengthy stature that fills the red and blue arachnid suit which draws a far closer semblance to the comics than does Maguire's diminutive clumsiness. Peter Parker, then, is an abounding improvement; we even get to see him as a child in the Prologue. His love interest, the newly monikered Gwen Stacy--no more scarlet-headed Mary Jane--played by the ultra-talented Emma Stone is a beachy, yet intelligent blonde, all emo-short skirts, high boots and blimpingly gazing eyes underscored with thick-painted eyeliner; she is terrific and delightfully lighter and more expressive in character than the cold, equivocally taciturn Mary Jane of previous films. The two together, though, don't always stick like one would want them to, as the pathos and jokes don't land consistently, but individually they work wonders. When a mid-plot twist reveals Gwen's father (Denis Leary) is head honcho of the police force, (Leary miserably nods along) the divided love affair between the two crossed teenagers assumes more of the same division as between Peter and Mary Jane, and ups the ante in cohesive sentiment. As for Martin Sheen and Sally Field as Uncle Ben and Aunt May, they are near perfect castings but neither is used nearly enough. And, the one-armed scientist-reptile-symbiote, Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans) the screenplay's poor excuse of a villain, is a character no more an antagonist than Peter Parker for a chunk of the film. He is brought to his monstrous transgressions by one Dr. Ratha, who demands that Connors create an antidote for an ailing company superior. While The Amazing Spider-Man does devote some attention to character revamping, namely Peter Parker and the fledgling Gwen Stacy, as well as capturing some subtle nuances from the comics, it also fails to web its components together, often revisiting the same plot points of its predecessor. Though forgiving the latter is sensible, the former is impeachable. What we're talking about: plot contrivances, continuity errors, gaping lapses in logic, and embarrassing coincidences. For one, not nearly enough is said about Peter's parents, particularly his father. Early on, Peter is searching the web (why is a teenage prodigy using Bing?) and it is there he whimsically finds an article of his father with Connors. Others include: what happened to Uncle Ben's murderer? What happened to Dr. Ratha after he was seen in his vehicle on the Williamsburg bridge? Why are no photos taken of the 8-foot tall reptile rampaging through cars like magots? Why are a swarm of lizards walking on a web of Spiderman's in the sewer? Who writes "Property of" on anything? Why do crane operators work during evacuations? If Dr. Connors' reptile-transforming serum was ephemeral, and thereby needed to be injected every four hours or so, why would he expose the entire New York population to it?; the effects would be short-lived. And, the last I will mention, why is Denis Leary the only police officer on the roof of the building in the finale, when hundreds of other SWAT personnel are meandering on the street, watching the hero and villain fight? It's these contrivances and more that mar all that 'Spider-man' offers; director Marc Webb can only feint the mishaps with unfulfilled emotive closeups that merely break up the pervasive silliness for a short time, but such aren't ever forgotten. By the looks of it, the making of 'Spider-man' was lost right from the boardroom; oh, there it is, WHOP! It's an icky mess to clean up. Expand
Metascore
66

Generally favorable reviews - based on 42 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 29 out of 42
  2. Negative: 2 out of 42
  1. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    Jul 5, 2012
    70
    This might be a fun summer blockbuster if only it even remotely needed to exist.
  2. Reviewed by: Marc Savlov
    Jul 3, 2012
    30
    In short, the character is a lot like the way Stan Lee first envisioned him, but the trilogy's screenwriter Steve Ditko would probably loathe this new, unsatisfying, and hollow-feeling entry into the new cinematic Marvel Universe.
  3. Reviewed by: Joshua Rothkopf
    Jul 3, 2012
    60
    On the whole, it's passable stuff, a surprise, given how mechanical the masked character seemed.